A 78-year-old Florida woman was accused of hiding $41K in cash in her bra, girdle, and various wallets. (Shutterstock)

(Newser)
–
A 78-year-old woman may lose nearly $41,000 earned from selling her home because she tried to smuggle it through Detroit Metro Airport—in her carry-on luggage, bra, and girdle, reports the Detroit Free Press. Customs officials became suspicious when Victoria Faren, traveling with her daughter in April, kept changing her story when asked how much money she had on her. The $200 she initially revealed quickly multiplied as officials discovered $8,000 crammed in wallets, $4,000 in a cloth sack, nearly $1,000 in sealed envelopes, $3,000 in Faren's shirt, $2,000 sewn into her bra strap, and—when authorities noticed a bulge in her backside—a whopping $21,000 in her girdle, according to ABC News.

Why did she do it? Court documents say Faren had already wired some money (from her $120,000 home sale) to the Philippines, but was afraid to mail the rest and figured she wasn't allowed to fly with it—though US Customs makes clear that she only had to fill out a form. Authorities say they don't have to give her the money back because it was a "currency reporting violation" that involved "bulk cash smuggling," notes the Free Press. Her daughter says she had no clue about Faren's covert cash, and adds that "her mother [is] old." (At least authorities didn't find any live animals stuffed in her suitcase.)

Mr. Joshua wrote: "I've heard that there are already US states in which it is legal for police to take money from you if you can't, or won't, tell them where it came from." Newser has the question in a pending review status. However, since the question had been a reply to my post, I will answer his question. The Federal asset forfeiture rule in the Unites States allows police people to do exactly that. It is one means of bypassing respectable due process. Law enforcement presumes that the assets originated with unlawful activity, and holds the assets on that basis. In addition to bank accounts, other assets are seized. The burden of proof rests with the person who stands to lose the money, that the money, or other property seized has no criminal origin. It is a civil action brought down on that person's head, by the wealthiest government in the world. With no money to take on the government, that person ends up poor and on the street. There is a financial incentive for law enforcement to take people's money, or property, because the proceeds fund law enforcement activities, including the excessive military gear paraded around even the smallest town in the United States. The behavior borders on fraud, and there has been a reform to the asset forfeiture law. However, it is still not enough for anyone with money in the bank, who unwittingly comes on the government's radar for any reason, including trying to board a flight with the proceeds from the sale of a house, without making a declaration. (See the news report on the 78 woman stopped at the airport). You will be gobsmacked because Australia, Canada and England, even without the guaranteed constitutional protections the United States parades around the world in the name of freedoms, never behave like that.

????

Aug 11, 2014 11:50 PM CDT

Wait. FRS spreads dollars like heroin all over the world and she is not allowed to HELP them?! That is some bureaucratic bullshit...